Abstract:For low-carbon electricity generating technologies to play a
significant role in the reduction of atmospheric CO2 emissions, the public
must accept their wide-spread deployment. This study asked members of the
general public to rank ten technologies (e.g., wind, nuclear, coal with
CCS, natural gas), and seven realistic low-carbon portfolios composed of
these technologies. Participants received comprehensive and carefully
balanced materials that systematically explained the costs and benefits of
each. These materials were developed with input from domain experts to
ensure correct information, and pilot-tested with members of the general
public to ensure understanding. After ranking the technologies and the
portfolios, participants also rated their overall opinion of CCS.
Participants’ rankings of technologies suggest that they most favored
energy efficiency, followed by nuclear, integrated gasification
combined-cycle coal (IGCC) with CCS and wind. The most preferred portfolio
included a mix of these four technologies. IGCC with CCS was preferred to
pulverized coal with CCS, whether presented as a technology or within a
portfolio. Coal technologies with CCS were preferred over those without
CCS. Participants’ rankings suggest acceptance of CCS, when presented in
comparison to other technologies and within a low-carbon portfolio.
However, when participants considered the technology in isolation, their
ratings showed only slightly favorable opinions of CCS. This finding
suggests a reluctant acceptance of CCS, given the alternatives. We
conclude that the general public may be willing to reluctantly accept CCS,
nuclear and other low-carbon technologies, once they fully understand the
benefits, cost and limitations of the alternatives.

PDF's are password protected. If you're a
first-time visitor and need a password, please click
here.